In full view

Crimes are usually committed in a place where no one else can see what is happening and who is committing it so as to ensure execution and possibly avoid arrest and prosecution. This is one case however which is quite unusual and different. This is the case of Axel, a 17-year-old drug dependent.

Axel has been confined in a drug rehabilitation center by order of the court on petition of his own mother. He escaped twice and had an outstanding order for recommitment to the rehabilitation center and an outstanding warrant of arrest for robbery. His family’s residence is located some 50 meters away from a peryahan erected within their property on the occasion of the town fiesta. So it was easy for him to frequent the place at night or even during daytime. He was known as a bully or siga and was thus feared especially by the peryahan transient helpers who were sleeping in a tent erected on the carnival grounds particularly 12-year-old Ronnie, Atong, Joey, Miyo and Kiko. They were assisting the carnival operator who put up a structure called “Wall of danger” where stunts are performed. A 12-year-old boy named Otep also used to go to the carnival grounds to run errands for the helpers.

At about 1 a.m., the tent helpers were awakened when they heard a woman shouting “Magnanakaw, Magnanakaw.” They asked the woman who the robber was and the woman replied that the culprit was a boy. Soon after, the helpers found Otep hiding in a ticket booth. So they tied his hands and feet with a rope and forced him to confess, but Otep did not relent.

Momentarily, Axel arrived and brought Otep to the covered structure of “Wall of Danger” where he was kept hanging from the top of the ladder with a live wire on his palms. Axel forced Otep to confess to the stealing but Otep still refused. So Axel untied him and brought him to a Darts and Balloon Booth and ordered the perya boys to guard Otep while he got a shovel and dug a knee deep pit near the wall of their house. Otep however was able to flee but was eventually recovered by Axel when he stepped on a galvanized sheet which created noise. Axel repeatedly boxed Otep and hit the latter with a dos por dos on the neck and jaw causing the barely unconscious Otep, to fall. Axel then brought Otep to the pit and buried him alive as he ordered the perya boys to disperse and not to divulge the incident to anyone or else they will be the next victim.

Later on however when they returned to their hometown Ronnie got the courage to report the killing to a radio commentator and to the police in their place. So the body of Otep was exhumed and autopsied by a doctor who found wounds that matched Ronnie’s story of how Otep was killed by Axel. So, Axel was accused of murder for killing Otep with treachery. Axel denied the charge and pointed to the perya boys as the perpetrators of the crime. He claimed that it was unnatural for him to commit the crime in full view of onlookers or even a peace officer completely impervious of the inevitability of criminal persecution and conviction. Furthermore, he contended that the delay and initial unwillingness of the witnesses to volunteer information regarding the particular crime proves that he did not do it.

But the Courts still found him guilty of murder and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment of ten (10) years and one (1) day up to fifteen years only because he was only 17 years old when he committed the crime. He was also sentenced to pay the corresponding damages.

The Supreme Court said that his guilt is in accordance with the evidence on record particularly the testimonies of Ronnie and Atong which coincides with the autopsy report on how he killed Otep. It is not unnatural for him to commit the crime in full view of onlookers because he was a drug dependent, an escapee from the rehabilitation center and had on order for recommitment which is the reason for his violent behavior toward Otep even in full view of onlookers.

The unwillingness of the onlookers and witnesses to immediately volunteer information due to fear of reprisal does not affect their credibility. Neither substantive or procedural law requires any person witnessing a crime to immediately report the crime to proper authorities especially if the delay has been sufficiently explained. Here the perya boys were aware that Axel was a drug dependent and a bully who was troublesome. They were aware that the carnival grounds belong to his family and he threatened them with harm if they would report to the police, what had just transpired. This sufficiently explains why they were initially reluctant. (People vs. Chua, G.R. 149538, July 26, 2004)

* * *

Email: [email protected]